FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1952
1952 - 0026.PDF
Hawker P.1067. de Havilland Comet. SWORDS and PLOUGHSHARES Why not both at once ? Building for sure defence and a sound economy AIR CHIEF MARSHAL SIR GUY GARROD and /% the Air League of the British Empire, of which he is chairman, can take pride in having touched off what amounts to a campaign that may prove of vital importance to the country. At a luncheon in London on November ist, in drawing attention to the serious weakness of Britain's military air potential, he emphasized that the cure was basically a matter of manpower and the development of the aircraft industry. He went on to say that in turbojet and turboprop aircraft this country had a lead of at least five years over the rest of the world, and that therefore we ought to be producing such machines in considerable numbers. We needed them as part of our military equipment and, at the same time, they would be most valuable exports, not least in securing a permanent position in the world market for many years to come. Yet we were in danger now of repeating the disastrous decision made during the last war— of leaving the building of transport aircraft to the Americans. Foreign airline operators fully appreciated the potentialities of the new gas-turbine aircraft, but could not be expected to order them unless they could be certain of delivery. But by expanding our output of transport aircraft we could, at one and the same time, create an actual and potential ex port trade and also make an indispensable addition to our air power resources. Mr. Churchill touched on similar matters in the House a few weeks ago. In discussing a rearmament programme which involves the expenditure of £1,250 million in the present year—a sum which, he said, we should not in fact succeed in spending—he gave the assurance : "It is per fectly clear that, in the sphere of the material things, the claims of the R.A.F. must have first and special emphasis in priority." Then he went on to say: "This will be made fully effective in any rearrangement of the programme upon which the new Government might decide. . . . The greatest source of concern in the Services is the slow progress in developing the R.A.F., especially in the supply of the latest machines. . . . To read the complaints that are made about the disappointments experienced in equipment, one would hardly believe that over 300 million pounds was being spent this year." There can be few intelligent people today who have failed to recognize the need for expansion of the aircraft industry for military production, and there must be many who have felt as Mr. Attlee does. He said during the course of the same debate, "no one knows better than the Prime Minister how heart-breaking are the delays in the produc tion of aircraft. They are called 'teething troubles.' One gets an aircraft and one thinks it is going ahead; trials are AN opportunity of a kind unlikely ever to present itself again— that or capitalizing in the world's markets our lead in gas-tur bine-powered transports—is now open to the British aircraft industry. Do current rearmament commitments really present an insurmountable bar to our seizing the chance? The question has lately been asked, in one form or another, by several men prominent in Service and civil affairs, and in this article we briefly recall references they have made to the subject. Follow ing it we print a forthright challenge to the industry, made by W/C Charles Gardner, well known both at Home and abroad as the aviation correspondent of the British Broadcasting Corpora tion. He recognizes that the greatest problem is that of manpower; and he makes a suggestion for its solution. His remedy may seem drastic, but he goes on to show that it would be justified by the ultimate prize. made and one thinks one is going to have delivery; but, in my experience, not only over the last six years, but in the five years before that, there are always delays." But in spite of the concern which so many people have felt and expressed regarding the slow production of new military aircraft, there has emerged, during the last weeks of 1951, a general realization that the well-being not only of the aircraft industry, but of the nation itself, may depend on the balancing of the production effort between aircraft essential for defence and others capable of earning vast sums in dollars and other currency. Ultimately we must provide for both. Talking of British civil airliners, Lord Ogmore, Minister of Civil Aviation in the late Government, said recently in the House of Lords : "Here is a market for the asking. To make use of it, it will mean that aircraft manufacturers will have to have more materials and more men in order to fulfil both these orders, and the military orders to which they are committed. I am afraid that it will mean some sort of funnelling of materials and men from industries which are not so important." To this, Lord Brabazon added that, "if the Secretary of State for Air will now acknowledge that air transportation is a military function of the Air Ministry, things will change a good deal." Lord Balfour of Inchrye, in his turn, said the success of our long-term policy depended finally on the supply of aircraft, while Lord Gifford thought that today this country had "a unique opportunity in the field of civil and transport aircraft," which he suggested should be treated as part of our rearmament policy; he pressed for "a powerful, bold and progressive programme," because this was an oppor tunity which might not recur in years." In the same debate, Lord Pakenham said that it would be a tragedy if, after having gone in front, we slipped behind again, and he asked whether Lord Selkirk would give con-
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
